Sunday, 30 March 2014

Turkey to hit hard on its Geopolitical strategy

Turkey
faces 'geography’s revenge' in Crimea

SUMMARY:

Turkey’s strategic environment has become even more complicated following the Russian annexation of Crimea. As the elections are round the corner in Turkey, Erdogan main focus would be on "strategic diplomacy". The job is tough - but Ankara seems determined to make its way, even if its shooting Syrian airplane down who was found violating Turkish airspace.

Russia’s seizure of Crimea
is a harbinger of a new Cold War that leaves Turkey facing complex situations
on a number of fronts, requiring careful diplomatic and political
management. Whether Ankara can rise to the occasion - given that the
government of Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan is up to its neck, in what it
sees as a "war of survival" against its political enemies at home - remains an open
question.

No matter how tense
the domestic situation may be, though, this is not a crisis that Turkey can afford to ignore or overlook, even if its ability to
influence the course of events is limited, if indeed it exists at all.

Foreign Minister Ahmet
Davutoglu has nevertheless spelled out Ankara’s “bottom line” as far as the
legal position is concerned - over the way Russia wrestled the Crimean Peninsula
from Ukraine’s control - and this is largely in tune with the position of the
West.

Davutoglu’s remarks
reflect ambivalence with regard to Russia, a superpower Turkey
cannot afford to alienate without ultimately harming its own strategic
security and economic interests.

Addressing a news
conference in Ankara earlier this week with Mustafa Kirimoglu, the former head
of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis (parliament) and now a deputy in the Ukrainian
parliament, Davutoglu attempted to sound a firm note when he said the recent
referendum in Crimea on the region’s status was a fait accompli that
lacked legitimacy.

“Crimea’s territorial
integrity is paramount. Any discussion on this topic must be based on Ukraine’s
territorial integrity,” Davutoglu said, underscoring the fact that Ankara will not accept the results of the Crimean referendum.

When asked, however,
what steps Turkey would take if Moscow insisted on annexing Crimea, Davutoglu
was circumspect. He pointed out that although Turkey is a NATO member there
were factors that placed it in a different position to other members of the
Western community.

“Turkey is the only
country that is a neighbor to both Ukraine and Russia. At the same time, it has
a direct maritime link to Crimea. Therefore, it is very important that we
should feel more concern than any other country and aim for strategic
diplomacy,” he said.

Despite his
underlining of Turkey’s unique placing in this crisis, Davutoglu nevertheless
signaled that rather than acting unilaterally, or trying to solve the problem
bilaterally with Moscow, Ankara would maintain close consultations with its
partners in the European Union and its NATO allies over this
crisis.

His remarks indicated
once again that when it comes to international crises, especially ones that
raise the specter of a new cold war that involves Russia and the West,
Turkey is more than likely to throw its lot in with its traditional allies.

Davutoglu’s remarks
also reveal the hope that Turkey’s Western allies will have an understanding of
the delicate situation Turkey is in vis-a-vis Russia, and therefore not leave
Ankara facing harder choices than it already finds itself facing.

All of this provides
further evidence that Erdogan’s initial ambitions of making Turkey a key
regional player — an ambition that already received a serious set of blows
in the Middle East following the Arab Spring — is a thing of the past.

Put another way, the
“revenge of geography,” to use Robert D. Kaplan’s term, is forcing Ankara to
return to Turkey’s traditionally cautious diplomacy, based on a preference for
multilateralism, while it maintains and deepens security arrangements with the
West.

This traditional line
also provides Turkey with more clout than it would have if it were acting as a
lone wolf facing the Russian bear, and this can already be discernible in the
attempts by Moscow to court Ankara through the Crimean Tatars.

Under normal
circumstances Russians have little love lost on the Tatars, due to historic
memories that stretch as far back as the Crimean War of 1853-56 and further,
but mainly because their collective notion of the Tatars as a nation that
betrayed them to the Nazi’s in World War II.

It's telling,
therefore, that Crimea's pro-Russian authorities are reportedly saying now that they will
guarantee Tatar representation in Crimea, and give this Turkic and Muslim
community proper land ownership rights and financial aid.

Vitaly Naumkin summarizes Russian expectations in his March 19 Al-Monitor article well,
when he indicates that Russia's relations with Turkey will now be particularly
important to Moscow: “The efforts to provide housing assistance to Tatar
repatriates in Crimea, after years of being forced to live in shacks, will
surely win the approval of the influential Crimean Tatar community in Turkey.
Given Turkey's geographic position and its interests in the Black Sea Basin, attractive proposals could be made for it to participate in
economic development projects in Crimea, whose economy has been in free fall
over the past two decades.”

Not surprisingly,
though, Crimean Tatars, having suffered a great deal under the Russians in
the past, remain wary of such enticements and would clearly prefer to remain
with Ukraine.

Russia’s reaching out
to the Tatars in this way, even if it ultimately lacks credibility,
nevertheless provides Ankara with a reason to try and engage Moscow on the
question of Tatar rights. It is clear that any advances Ankara can help secure
in this regard will also help Erdogan ward off domestic criticism from
nationalist quarters that are already blaming his government of standing
idly as the Tatars are put in peril.

In terms of the big
picture, however, Russia’s “Crimea grab” has Turkish diplomats worried over much
more than just the welfare of the Tatars, and Davutoglu gave plenty of hints
about this during his news conference with Kirimoglu this week.

Warning about a
“domino effect” as a result of the fait accompli in Crimea, Davutoglu
pronounced Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova by name in this regard, saying that
the territorial integrity of these countries can not be placed at risk by means
of any referendum. “Once you allow this, the whole region will become
unstable,” Davutoglu said, thanking the Crimean Tatars for boycotting the March
16 referendum.

Naumkin’s remarks in
his March 19 Al-Monitor article, in which he argues that the
events in Crimea will provide “impetus to self-determination movements” around
the world, going on to suggest that the Kurds will also react to these events
also provides a clear hint as to why Ankara is concerned.

In addition to all
this, Russia’s return to the Middle East — following what it sees as its
major success in Crimea — as an even more assertive power than it already
is will also affect Ankara’s policies toward the region. It is no surprise
that Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad — Erdogan’s nemesis — is
making no secret of his joy over developments relating to Crimea.

Meanwhile, an
anti-Western Russia that yields clout in the Middle East will also provide
Egypt’s military rulers — who are the object of much vilification by
Erdogan — with fresh options against the West should Europe and the United
States pressurize them on the basis of democratic arguments.

Egyptian Defense Minister Abdel
Fattah al-Sisi has already laid the initial groundwork for strategic
cooperation between Egypt and Russia, when he visited Moscow in February and
was given a warm welcome by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

All of these
developments weaken the Erdogan government’s hand, while strengthening
the position of Russia’s allies and friends in the Middle East, who also
happen to be Erdogan’s enemies. In essence, the general picture for Ankara,
following the Crimean crisis, does not look good and will indeed require
“strategic diplomacy,” to use Davutoglu’s words.

About Me

No one knows where the life will lead us to! But only if we work to the cause of "justice" and to give a helping hand to others, then , we can see the path of truth! We all are accustomed to follow the rules of the traditions and not be ourselves, but ,,,,,,Changing the image of the Limestone, Achieving for the Milestone! How can you achieve the Best, if you shall settle like the Rest!????!